BuddysBud said:
eric76 said:
_mpaul said:
AustinAg2K said:
Franklin Delano Bluth said:
I'm not understanding how this is considered a power play or how this strategy will help Democrats in any way...
They voted to impeach, but now refuse take articles to trial
They're literally admitting to playing games at this point
Is there a time limit on how long the impeachment is good for? I'm wondering if she intends on keeping the impeachment until after the election in hopes the Democrats gain a majority in the Senate.
Great question. I can't imagine it survives past the end of this Congress, much like a bill sent to the Senate from the House but then not acted on.
That's not the case at all. Impeachments survive the end of one Congress and into the next Congress.
What would change is that if the trial was going on at the end of one Congress and into the next Congress, any House managers who were no longer in office would have to be replaced. Also, if the Republicans took the House, then they would surely replace the House managers with Republicans.
Where does it say that in the Construction?
If impeachment is a political process and the president is re-elected then the voters (states) have decided. It looks like you, like Nancy, are just making up BS as you go along.
An impeachment is not a legislative matter.
For what it's worth, we have an example of an impeachment in one Congress and the trial in the next -- Bill Clinton.
Clinton was impeached in December of 1998 under the 105th Session of Congress. His impeachment trial was in January of 1999 under the 106th Session of Congress.
If I remember correctly, there were those who argued that Clinton's impeachment should be void because the 105th Session ended before the trial, but that was found to not be the case at all.